| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| |
<
< | Technology's Impact on Identity: A Fragile, Reactive Self | >
> | How The Software We Use Rewrites Our Identity: A Fragile, Reactive Self | | | -- By LinaHackenberg - 25 Oct 2024 | |
<
< | Technology fundamentally disrupts our ability to know and define ourselves. By overstimulating us with endless distractions and isolating us from meaningful human connections, it prevents the internal reflection and external support needed for a stable identity. This essay explores how, in a world dominated by technology, we risk losing touch with who we are. This leaves our sense of self fragile, reactive, and vulnerable to external forces. | >
> | The digital tools and systems we rely on fundamentally disrupt our ability to know and define ourselves. By overstimulating us with endless distractions and isolating us from meaningful human connections, they prevent the internal reflection and external support needed for a stable identity. This essay explores how, in a world dominated by digital platforms, we risk losing touch with who we are. This leaves our sense of self fragile, reactive, and vulnerable to external forces. | | | | |
<
< | Overstimulation | >
> | Yet, these challenges are not inherent to “the digital” itself but arise from the deliberate design of software that seeks to exploit our attention and dependence. By reevaluating and reshaping this design, we can move beyond fragility and reactivity to reclaim autonomy and stability. | | | | |
<
< | With technology constantly bombarding us with messages, notifications, and advertisements, and making us switch between roles, personas, and contexts, we enter a state of overstimulation. This state does not allow us to pause, process, or reflect. It erodes the internal reflection needed to know and define ourselves, leaving us reactive, shaped by external inputs rather than personal thoughts. | | | | |
<
< | Messages, notifications, advertisements | >
> | Overstimulation Makes Us Reactive | | | | |
<
< | Most of us carry a phone right next to our body – where we feel it close to us, all the time. It allows us to “go all around the world” ((https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/01/biztech/articles/15compute.html), all the time. Its constant stream of messages, notifications, and advertisements, however, acts as stimuli, triggering a response in our brain, all the time. With our attention constantly drawn to recurring stimuli, uninterrupted thought becomes impossible. This prevents us from exploring ideas, forming conclusions, and integrating experiences into a coherent identity. While stopping us from exploring our thoughts, the stream of messages, notifications, and advertisements constantly exposes us to external input. We observe what others are doing, how they are feeling, what they want us to do and how they want us to feel, forgetting what we want ourselves. The constant flux of input has made us rely on others more than our instincts, trusting their input over our own. We consult them before making the slightest move, because we can, because they might know better. This makes us touch our phone 2,600 times a day (https://pages.dscout.com/hubfs/downloads/dscout_mobile_touches_study_2016.pdf?_ga=2.180416224.67221035.1650551540-199217915.1650551540), not due to OCD, but due to dependency. Being overly dependent on external input, we ultimately lose the confidence to think and act independently, leaving us reactive, disconnected from our inner voice and unsure of who we are. | >
> | We keep a phone constantly close. It allows us to "go all around the world" but floods us with a constant stream of stimuli — messages, notifications, and advertisements. These endless triggers prevent uninterrupted thought, stopping us from exploring ideas or integrating experiences into a coherent identity. Instead, we absorb external input, observing what others do, feel, and want, while losing touch with our own desires. Over time, we come to trust external input more than ourselves, checking our phones 2,600 times a day — not out of OCD, but dependency. This “habit” weakens our ability to think and act independently, leaving us reactive and disconnected from our inner voice. | | | | |
<
< | Roles, personas, contexts | >
> | Digital interactions also compel us to constantly switch between roles and personas. Parent, partner, professional — each role imposes expectations, demanding a different version of ourselves. Balancing these often conflicting identities undermines a coherent sense of self, leaving us confused and unsettled. This incessant adaptation prevents us from grounding in a stable identity, making us reactive to others' shifting expectations. | | | | |
<
< | Constant digital exchange, in addition to producing endless input, makes us switch between roles, personas, and contexts. Responding to different people or engaging in various social media platforms, portraying different sides of ours, we are constantly adapting. Parent, child, partner, professional, all roles come with specific expectations and behavior patterns, requiring different versions of our identity. Balancing these, often conflicting, versions of ourselves, undermines sustaining a coherent narrative of who we are. The incoherence leaves us confused and unsettled. The constant switching prevents us from grounding in a stable identity and makes us reactive to others` changing expectations. | >
> | While external input and adaptive behavior are not new, the design of digital systems has drastically increased their pace. As our minds struggle to keep up with the constant exposure and adaption, we become overstimulated. This erodes the mental space for self-reflection, disrupting our ability to define ourselves. Without this foundation, we rely on others to tell us who we are. | | | | |
<
< | Reactive Self | | | | |
<
< | While exposure to input and adapted behavior are not new, technology has drastically increased their pace. As our minds struggle to keep up with the constant exposure and adaption, we become overstimulated. This overstimulation erodes the mental space for self-reflection and thus disrupts our ability to know and define ourselves. Not knowing ourselves, we rely on others to tell us who we are and become reactive. | >
> | Isolation Makes Us Fragile | | | | |
<
< | Isolation | >
> | Thus, we require genuine human connections to better understand our identity. Yet, despite promising "universal connectivity," the tools and platforms we use often weaken these connections. | | | | |
<
< | Since overstimulation leaves us unsure of who we are, we require genuine human connections for stability, self-confidence, and honest reflection to better understand our identity. Yet, despite offering “universal connectivity” (https://moglen.law.columbia.edu/LIS/archive/univconn/friedman-catches-on.html), technology often weakens our genuine human connections. Becoming increasingly isolated, we lose the support needed to build a stable identity, rendering our sense of self fragile. | >
> | Digital connections, while widely preferred, often lack the depth of genuine human relationships. Social platforms expands our social circle, but more connections often result in fewer meaningful relationships—those built on time, trust, and honesty. To avoid these demands, many turn to digital interactions that offer an "illusion of companionship" without the effort and vulnerability needed for true intimacy. Though seemingly easier, these connections cannot provide us with stability, self-confidence, or honest reflection. Instead, they offer superficial feedback, which we should not rely on to better understand our identity. | | | | |
<
< | Digital connections | >
> | The design of these platforms also weakens real-life connections by eroding our ability to listen and care about the person in front of us. Even in person, phones create barriers, pulling focus from meaningful interaction. When we fail to listen, we miss opportunities to connect meaningfully. Again, distraction is nothing new, but the ability to hear or see distant events during conversations exacerbates the problem. This constant exposure shifts our attention to elsewhere, prioritizing distant events over those present. As a result, genuine real-life connections are weakened. This isolates us from the meaningful relationships we need. Without this external support, our sense of self becomes fragile, lacking the reinforcement that only genuine human connections provide. | | | | |
<
< | Although preferred by many, digital connections often lack the qualities we require from genuine human connections. Technology expands our social circle, increasing opportunities for connection. Yet, more connections often mean fewer quality relationships – the kind we need for vulnerability. Such relationships do not necessarily require face to face contact, but require time, trust and honesty. To avoid these demands, many resort to digital connections that offer the “illusion of companionship” (https://moglen.law.columbia.edu/books/alonetogether00turkle.djvu) without the investment needed for true intimacy. While this feels easier, these connections lack the depth necessary to provide us with stability, self-confidence, and honest reflection. Instead, they offer superficial feedback, on which we should not rely to better understand our identity. | >
> | Free Software Can Restore Our Identity | | | | |
<
< | Real-life connections | >
> | But it does not have to be this way. There is nothing inherent in smartphones, computers, or digital systems that must overstimulate or isolate us. The impacts we experience stem from the software we use. | | | | |
<
< | As technology erodes our ability to listen and care about the person in front of us, it weakens our real-life connections, rendering their support for our identity limited. Even in physical proximity, our phones create barriers by consuming our attention and diminishing our ability to listen. When we fail to listen, we miss chances to connect meaningfully. Again, distraction is nothing new, but that we can not only think about something else but hear or see it during meaningful conversations exacerbates the problem (https://moglen.law.columbia.edu/LIS/archive/education/02WIRE.html). Constantly exposed to everything happening elsewhere, distant events often seem more important than the person in front of us. We care more about “other things” and less about those present. Consequently, reduced listening and care weaken real-life connections to a surface level, limiting their ability to provide the stability, confidence, and honest reflection we need. | >
> | The software we rely on is built around the "market for eyeballs" model, treating human attention as a resource to exploit. This model explains why many tools are intentionally designed to make us reactive and emotionally vulnerable — keeping us dependent and constantly engaged. By reducing users to mere "eyeballs" rather than recognizing them as "active intelligences," these systems prioritize control and distraction, sacrificing empowerment and meaningful connection in favor of profit. | | | | |
<
< | Fragile Self | >
> | Yet, this is not inevitable. We can choose software that supports our autonomy instead of undermining it. If software were designed to serve users, the dynamics of control would shift back to us — allowing us to reclaim the freedom and mental clarity we have lost. This is not speculative. Programs built on the principles of free software, which enable users to modify and control their tools, already exist. | | | | |
<
< | By selling the illusion of connection and weakening real-life connections, technology isolates us from meaningful human connections. This deprives us of the external support we need to build a stable identity. Without this support, our sense of self becomes fragile and vulnerable, lacking the reinforcement that comes from genuine relationships. | >
> | Legal scholar Eben Moglen exemplifies this approach. Over fifty years of using computers, he has never seen an advertisement on his devices. Notifications on his systems are carefully crafted by him to avoid disrupting his focus. The tools he uses, which exclude social media, enhance personal relationships without overwhelming him with unnecessary communication. This demonstrates that a world where software supports autonomy and meaningful connection is not a distant ideal — it already exists. Living in it requires no expensive investments, no expensive investments, only a willingness to learn and make intentional choices about the software we use. | | | Conclusion | |
<
< | To conclude, technology leaves us stuck between overstimulation and isolation. Overstimulation following constant exposure us to external stimuli erases self-reflection and continuing thought. Without reflection, we become disconnected from our sense of self and reactive to external input as we lose the ability to think and act independently. Simultaneously, our unwillingness to invest in relationships and inability to listen and care renders genuine human connection unlikely, leaving us isolated and fragile. As a result, we lose sight of who we are, leaving us with a reactive, fragile sense of self, easily molded by external forces. | >
> | The fragility and reactivity of identity often blamed on digital systems are, in reality, the product of poorly designed software that prioritizes profit over empowerment. By reshaping how these systems interact with us, we can transform them into tools for clarity, connection, and personal growth. The solutions already exist; reclaiming our sense of self simply requires the willingness to take control of the systems shaping our lives.
| | | | |
<
< | One route to improvement is to tighten the writing, plenty. Your outlining is sufficient at the section level, but not enough to keep your paragraphs disciplined. Each sentence must make a distinct contribution and every word in each sentence must pull its weight. What doesn't must go, at both levels. Almost a quarter of the existing draft can be removed without loss. | >
> | Feedback First Draft: One route to improvement is to tighten the writing, plenty. Your outlining is sufficient at the section level, but not enough to keep your paragraphs disciplined. Each sentence must make a distinct contribution and every word in each sentence must pull its weight. What doesn't must go, at both levels. Almost a quarter of the existing draft can be removed without loss. | | | Substantively, the most important avenue to increased learning is to break apart the abstraction "technology" and "the digital,." This mistaken essentialism is getting in the way of your pursuing your question. There's nothing that says computers used by people have to disturb attention or create isolation. The physiology of our network (how it behaves and how it structures our individual experiences of the world) is determined by software. If the software works differently, the effect of "technology" can be radically different. If the relation between software and people is different (if, for example, all software can be changed by those who use it) then the direction of control (how software's structuring of the network structures our life experience) will be changed radically: we will live differently, choosing how, not having the texture chosen for us. |
|